NTSB prelim report out

I have a question which the report doesn't clarify.

What type of airspace was the glider and bizjet flying
in at the time?

Controlled or VFR?

Paul Buchanan

http://www.glidingstuff.co.nz

Quebec Tango wrote:
Jim,

Would you agree or disagree that it is unusual for a preliminary
accident report to contain such a direct statement about the
interpretation of the FARs (or anything else)? This seems to me to be
pretty far out of the mainstream of the SOP for investigations.

The statement seems uninformed at best, and tempts me question the
overall qualithy of this investigation process.


I agree, that's farther than I would ever go, but I'm not NTSB.

One correction to my earlier statement regarding enforcements, if an
FAA enforcement case goes all of the way to an NTSB law judge (a small
number of them make it that far) it becomes public record that you can
read at ntsb.gov.

Jim

My motivation for all this is that this investigation is likely to
produce just slightly less upset than if it were a 121 carrier involved
and will spawn lots of debate of all qualities about who should be able
to fly where and when and with what equipment. I would like to think
that the investigation of such a sensitive event would be handled by
highly qualified personnel operating impartially. The way this prelim
report is written does not give me confidence that the investigator is
up to par and/or that other invisible forces are not at work.

I have a transponder installed, it has been verified to put out a
strong signal, and like Doug Haluza carry enough batteries to sustain
Manhatten during a blackout. Almost exactly one year ago at a contest,
while thermalling on the edge of a Class C airspace, the glider on the
other side of the thermal (we were the two at the top) was passed by a
commuter descending through the cloud bases way too close for comfort
(I could hear the turboprop loudly). My guess is 50 feet from the
other glider and 200 feet from me. We had been circling for more than
a few minutes and my transponder was going R R R R Reply continuously.
We were well below cloud base when it happened.

Was their TCAS inop? Did the ATC have slow moving 1200s filtered out?
Did they just igonore the TCAS and/or ATC? I was never able to find
out. After the other discussions relating to reasons why conflicts
occur with IFR traffic even with operating transponders in use is very
worrysome. And the specter of some half-baked solution coming out of
the Minden incident is not conforting.

I think as a community we need to make it clear we expect the best on
all sides from this investigation early on.

wrote:
Quebec Tango wrote:
Jim,

Would you agree or disagree that it is unusual for a preliminary
accident report to contain such a direct statement about the
interpretation of the FARs (or anything else)? This seems to me to be
pretty far out of the mainstream of the SOP for investigations.

The statement seems uninformed at best, and tempts me question the
overall qualithy of this investigation process.


I agree, that's farther than I would ever go, but I'm not NTSB.

One correction to my earlier statement regarding enforcements, if an
FAA enforcement case goes all of the way to an NTSB law judge (a small
number of them make it that far) it becomes public record that you can
read at ntsb.gov.

Jim

I have a question which the report doesn't clarify.

What type of airspace was the glider and bizjet flying
in at the time?

Controlled or VFR?

Paul Buchanan

http://www.glidingstuff.co.nz

wrote:
wrote:
I believe the glider pilot was from Japan. May be time for a hasty
retreat back to the homeland.

Do I detect some subtle or not so subtle prejudice here ?

Only in your response, Charles.


Jack

Paul Buchanan wrote:
I have a question which the report doesn't clarify.

What type of airspace was the glider and bizjet flying
in at the time?

Controlled or VFR?

Paul Buchanan

http://www.glidingstuff.co.nz

Should have been class G. Glider was VFR, Jet was IFR in VMC.

I have a question which the report doesn't clarify.

What type of airspace was the glider and bizjet flying
in at the time?

Controlled or VFR?

Paul Buchanan

http://www.glidingstuff.co.nz

Here I go again...

Had the pilot been an American, would the original comment have been
"May be time for a hasty retreat back to (name the State of your choice
here) ? Or perhaps was the initial post a mild joke, suggesting that a
hasty retreat would put the unfortunate pilot beyond the grasp of the
FAA, NTSB, etc...?

Cheers anyhow, Charles

Are you sure this is a possible reading? I would have
guessed that the aircraft could not be flown other
than with a ferrying permit to an inspection site.

At 20:48 09 September 2006, Doug Haluza wrote:

No, but the rules do require that the transponder must
have been tested
every 24 months, and cannot be operated unless it has.
So if it is
installed but not tested then it must be off.

Now, if you did not know the current status of the
test, you would be
in a tough spot. I would suggest that from a regulatory
standpoint the
most prudent thing to do would be to leave it off,
but from a safety
standpoint, it would probably be better if it was on.
A good lawyer
could probably argue either position.

Paul, in the US, it can be "IFR controlled" and "VFR", where VFR aircraft
such as the glider can roam freely in VFR (Visual Flight Rules) or VMC
(Visual Meteorological Conditions) in the same airspace that IFR ATC
controlled traffic can be, the altitudes reported have been 13,500 to 16,500
MSL when they hit.

Positive Control (Class A) starts at 18,000MSL and up, and they were well
clear of any Class C or Class D airspace around Reno NV, so they were in
Class E airspace in VFR or VMC conditions.

I would have to check the local chart for Class G in that area. But Class E
exists over the Continental US from 14,500MSL to 17,999 and from FL600 and
up.

BT

"Paul Buchanan" wrote in message
...
I have a question which the report doesn't clarify.

What type of airspace was the glider and bizjet flying
in at the time?

Controlled or VFR?

Paul Buchanan

http://www.glidingstuff.co.nz